Re: Question about using new request_threaded_irq
From: Marcos Lois BermÃdez
Date: Mon Dec 17 2012 - 11:06:38 EST
Hi,
I lot of thanks for you fast reply. It seem that i swap the mean of
handler parameters, so i now see it correct. :).
Excuse for my newbie question.
handler is the primary handler, and if NULL a default primary handler is
installed, and thread_fn is the thread handler.
I'm a bit confusing because i see a outdated page that talks about this
new IRQ API, but now i see that it's very outdated:
http://lwn.net/Articles/302043/
Regards.
El 17/12/2012 16:37, Jonathan Corbet escribiÃ:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:11:22 +0100
Marcos Lois BermÃdez <marcos.discalis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
For my understand if i call for example:
request_threaded_irq(irqmum, NULL, irq_handle, IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING,
DEVICE_NAME, priv);
This seem to make a old Hard IRQ handler, and inside of this handler
sleep APIs can't be used, but i see some SPI drivers that seem to
register a IRQ of this form and make API calls that can sleep in the
handler.
Not quite. The prototype for request_threaded_irq() is:
int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
irq_handler_t thread_fn, unsigned long irqflags,
const char *devname, void *dev_id)
Note the presents of *two* handlers, called "handler" and "thread_fn".
The first, "handler", is called in interrupt context; it's job is usually
to quiet the device and return; it cannot sleep. If it's return value is
IRQ_WAKE_THREAD, the thread_fn() will be called in process context; it
*can* sleep. In the example you cite, there is no immediate handler, only
the thread_fn(); the call to a blocking function from within the
thread_fn() is correct.
Hope that helps,
jon
Jonathan Corbet / LWN.net / corbet@xxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/